MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077099791 · doi:10.1109/lcn.2012.6423655

Characterizing cyberlocker traffic flows

2012· article· en· W2077099791 on OpenAlexaff
Aniket Mahanti, Niklas Carlsson, Martin Arlitt, Carey Williamson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInternet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTraffic generation modelTraffic shapingThe InternetInternet trafficReliability (semiconductor)Computer networkTraffic flow (computer networking)Network traffic controlWeb trafficPopularityFloating car dataNetwork traffic simulationTraffic congestionTransport engineeringEngineeringWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyberlockers have recently become a very popular means of distributing content. Today, cyberlocker traffic accounts for a non-negligible fraction of the total Internet traffic volume, and is forecasted to grow significantly in the future. The underlying protocol used in cyberlockers is HTTP, and increased usage of these services could drastically alter the characteristics of Web traffic. In light of the evolving nature of Web traffic, updated traffic models are required to capture this change. Despite their popularity, there has been limited work on understanding the characteristics of traffic flows originating from cyberlockers. Using a year-long trace collected from a large campus network, we present a comprehensive characterization study of cyberlocker traffic at the transport layer. We use a combination of flow-level and host-level characteristics to provide insights into the behavior of cyberlockers and their impact on networks. We also develop statistical models that capture the salient features of cyberlocker traffic. Studying the transport-layer interaction is important for analyzing reliability, congestion, flow control, and impact on other layers as well as Internet hosts. Our results can be used in developing improved traffic simulation models that can aid in capacity planning and network traffic management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInternet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-votingFrench-language works237,207